warriorsstepup wrote:One series ? you must not remember earlier in the season during January/February when this issue was documented, not just this series. Lack of perimeter shooting had been an issue.

We lost game one because of coaching plain and simple, you don't lose a 16 point, please no excuses for that.

He is the coach, he didn't just get out coached the after game 1 and 2, Pop ran laps on him. The infusion of small ball just because it worked against Nuggets doesn't mean it will work against Spurs, specially after Splitter came back which changed the game.

Fluke, random variation. It's why use the entire season as a sample, otherwise you are manipulating the data to support a conclusion without concrete evidence for that conclusion.

Our defense is centered around getting the opponent to take a lot of threes (second most in the league vs us) and having them hit at a lower percentage (35 percent, which is fifth best)

When team take a lot of threes vs you, there is a chance they have a blow up, get hot. It's why chuckers like Ellis, Jennings, Gay, Smith can have really good games. If you take a lot of shots than there will be games where the majority of them go in.

It was the guys' first post season as a coach EVER... And he took the 3rd greatest playoff coach of all-time to a 6-game series, that was an ice cold stretch in the 4Q of G1 from pushing this to a 7-game series. The fulcrum of Jackson's half court offense is Lee. It's why Lee was an all-star again; it's why everyone thinks the Warriors need to run more; cause Curry gets more shots when the Dubs execute in transition. David Lee is hands down the best offensive big man in that entire series matchup. His loss can't be undervalued. Jackson had to juggle losing his offensive catalyst against the best current coach's hall-of-fame ability to adjust and prepare and scheme.

As Blackfoot is correctly stating in this thread, for Jackson to be this success in his 2nd year with NO experience on the bench as an assistant or anything... It's really good. He had to out-duel George Karl and Gregg Poppovich and he went 6-6. I'd say that's not too shabby against 2 future hall-of-fame coaches at the top of their game.

Yeah, it can't be stressed enough on how good Pop is and why he is probably the second best coach of all time. And 32 is also absolutely right with what he said about Lee. Lee was the tenth best scorer this year, his loss was huge.

Fluke ? its not fluke, there are countless games I count were teams killed on shooting threes, it was just extremely bad during the months of Jan/Feb. If a team shots well from the perimeter don't dare them to do so.

First year coach or not, you don't lose a 16 point lead, with 4 minutes left, any amateur coach can keep a lead like that. No matter how great a coach is against another that is un-except and if that is ok, then I hear nothing but excuses.

I am not saying Mark Jackson is bad fit for the team, but if we are trying to go to another level, can't make amateur moves like he did.

warriorsstepup wrote:Fluke ? its not fluke, there are countless games I count were teams killed on shooting threes, it was just extremely bad during the months of Jan/Feb. If a team shots well from the perimeter don't dare them to do so.

First year coach or not, you don't lose a 16 point lead, with 4 minutes left, any amateur coach can keep a lead like that. No matter how great a coach is against another that is un-except and if that is ok, then I hear nothing but excuses.

I am not saying Mark Jackson is bad fit for the team, but if we are trying to go to another level, can't make amateur moves like he did.

If you don't consider those flukes, do you consider the opposite extreme a fluke? We have had games where we held our opponent to crazy low percentages. You can't have it both way. Do you believe our team plays historically good defense and historically bad defense at times? It's neither, it's just random variation and where we end up based on the season is where we actually are. Which is a top five defense on the perimeter. You can disagree with that if you want, but you'd be wrong.

Consistency they were not consistent enough guarding the perimeter when you slip up and have horrible defensive stretches allowing threes. It is not a coincident it is bad perimeter defense, watching the ball not your man, saw too many of that. Warriors dare other teams to shoot from the three, its not going to work with all the teams, sag on a good three point shooting team and you will get burnt. Playoffs magnifies this, fact is spurs found wide open shots from the perimeter. Saw this through out the season, they need to improve their perimeter defense, specially for teams that shoot well.

Attachments

Saw too much of this, watching the ball not the man you guarding. Warriors perimeter 1.jpg (100.88 KiB) Viewed 2405 times

Result wide open threes, even I could hit that if I get that much space. Warriors perimeter 2.jpg (99.34 KiB) Viewed 2405 times

If Mike Malone leaves to be the King's head coach, then this team really needs to look for a solid replacement. Malone is the x's and o's guy of this team. Jackson is just the "C'mon guys", "lets play hard" or "they're playing our song" motivating coach. At every huddle, it seems as if the team surrounds Malone for the play call and strategy then Jackson steps in and is "Lets do it". That comes from Jackson not having much experience and he could get better but for the time being, they need that Mike Malone behind him.

Blackfoot wrote:I already conceded Curry played bad three point defense this series, partly because he was hobbled, partly because he overhelped.

That doesn't change the fact we are the fifth best defensive team on the perimeter. One series doesn't change that and putting this much stock into a six game sample is an irresponsible way to judge.

That has nothing to do with his injury, he was looking at the ball the rest of the warriors with the exception of Klay who stayed with his player. Had nothing to do with injury, its just bad perimeter defense and lack of discipline that the warriors need to fix.

BayAreaHoopz wrote:If Mike Malone leaves to be the King's head coach, then this team really needs to look for a solid replacement. Malone is the x's and o's guy of this team. Jackson is just the "C'mon guys", "lets play hard" or "they're playing our song" motivating coach. At every huddle, it seems as if the team surrounds Malone for the play call and strategy then Jackson steps in and is "Lets do it". That comes from Jackson not having much experience and he could get better but for the time being, they need that Mike Malone behind him.

That is what I have heard also, he is the x and o's guy. He is a hot candidate for multiple job openings the latest I heard was the Clippers who recently let go of Del Negro. Wouldn't be surprised if he took a head coaching job.

Defensive wins, this report claims our interior defense is not he issue instead allowing teams to shoot three pointers at top of the key is the issue. Highlighted are parts I find important. Confirms for me what I believe, warriors dare teams to shoot on them from beyond the arc, even good 3 point shooting teams. Top of the key they allow the most three point shots in the league 125 more shots than the next team, and they getting burnt as it results at -4 defensive wins. So yes perimeter defense is an issue that needs work.

This season a bizarre turnaround has happened. The Warriors actually have really good Interior defense. In fact, they’ve earned 3.1 wins from this. I feel I should explain. All teams allow some number of interior shots each game. The Warriors are actually worse than most teams when it comes to opponent efficiency (blame David Lee if you want!) However, the Warriors allow the 6th fewest interior shots in the league! In fact, Kirk made this point – the shots teams don’t take matter too! We see the Warriors opponents seem to taking more interior shots outside of the restricted area and earning some ground. That said, overall the Warriors interior defense is actually very good this season!

Once again we see the problem lies in three point shooting. I feel we should point out two critical facts here. Last season the Warriors were terrible on perimeter defense. This year, they’ve actually improved. Their opponents shoot 33.3% from above the break. This is considerably below average (35.1%) It seems that teams still think the Warriors are bad at perimeter defense though. The Warriors’ opponents have attempted by far the most above the break three pointers at 1237. The Houston Rockets are in second place, over 125 shot attempts behind!

Our defense is to have the wings prevent driving and have them take long jumpers to make up for our poor interior defense. Our interior players didn't prevent them from getting to the perimeter, the wings did.

If we have the fifth best three point defense percentage of course we want opponents to take a lot of threes. A three point contest between us and another team is a war we won't lose. We don't sag off and allow wide open threes, we sag off enough to dare them to take threes, but they are still very much contested, and they are very much low percentage compared to the rest of the league.

"This is considerably below average (35.1%) It seems that teams still think the Warriors are bad at perimeter defense though. "

This particular quote acknowledges our excellent three point defense. So I am not sure why you are using it to highlight any kind of significant point to say our three point defense is bad.

Secondly, our defense was designed for most of the year to cover up the deficiencies on the inside. Which is why teams took so many threes on us. Because that's what we wanted.

You are ignorant to the scheme if you believe it was because of lack of discipline.

That logic is ridiculous, admitting, allowing teams to shoot open threes. The lack of adjustment, all teams are not the same, you alter and change. Allowing good teams to shoot open threes is horrible horrible logic. Even then the fundamentals watching the ball instead of the man, is horrible, in basketball you contest shots.

warriorsstepup wrote:That logic is ridiculous, admitting, allowing teams to shoot open threes. The lack of adjustment, all teams are not the same, you alter and change. Allowing good teams to shoot open threes is horrible horrible logic. Even then the fundamentals watching the ball instead of the man, is horrible, in basketball you contest shots.

They weren't open threes, they were slightly contested threes. It's why we have the fifth best three point percentage.